Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
only yeti with dh skills
Joined
·
255 Posts
ever seen one?

Dartman said:
Bah! Tis but a scratch!

It would've gone right through the lowers on a 888.

Mike
hey....have u ever seen one 888 take at least 3 direct hits at once in a rock garden at high speed?..well i ve seen mine...and no cracks nor gouges...just paint scrapes.the only thing i can complain about my 888 are the paint and the bad quality bolts.
as for the fox40...i was reading some textbooks about structural strenght and stuff and in my opinion the 40 can be compared to a monocoque frame....it s strong as long as it mantains in shape, in the case of a cylinder like the 40 the bigger u make the lowers in diameter the stronger it will be without having to add any material to make thicker walls...but again as i said, the strenght of it depends entirely on the structural integrity and not as much on the material as it is on the 888...remember this are only some thoughts of mine....could be true...couldn t be true...anyway...i would be really worried if i had gouges that big on a 40.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
Maybe put some carbon fiber tubing over the lowers

tyler durden said:
I love the fork, just wish it was as tuff as a marzocchi.
the gouge by my thumb is deep, scary. but It hasn,t given me any problems so oh well.
Maybe put some carbon fiber tubing over the lowers to protect them. I think Fox is using a thinner wall on the lowers than the Marzochhi forks to keep the weight down. Using larger diameter tubing with thinner walls will flex less and is lighter than smaller diameter thicker wall tubing, but is more prone to dents. One of my DH race teamates had some carbon fiber that was slit on the inside so they could go around the lowers of his Boxxer forks to protect them, he punched a hole through his Boxxers before he had the carbon fiber protectors.
Erik
Balle Racing
www.balleracing.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,523 Posts
BalleRacing said:
Maybe put some carbon fiber tubing over the lowers to protect them. I think Fox is using a thinner wall on the lowers than the Marzochhi forks to keep the weight down. Using larger diameter tubing with thinner walls will flex less and is lighter than smaller diameter thicker wall tubing, but is more prone to dents. One of my DH race teamates had some carbon fiber that was slit on the inside so they could go around the lowers of his Boxxer forks to protect them, he punched a hole through his Boxxers before he had the carbon fiber protectors.
Erik
Balle Racing
www.balleracing.com
i thought it was cause they used lighter metal which could have also been softer. But the carbon fiber lowers look nice i would get them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
dent

El Dorado said:
hey....have u ever seen one 888 take at least 3 direct hits at once in a rock garden at high speed?..well i ve seen mine...and no cracks nor gouges...just paint scrapes.the only thing i can complain about my 888 are the paint and the bad quality bolts.
as for the fox40...i was reading some textbooks about structural strenght and stuff and in my opinion the 40 can be compared to a monocoque frame....it s strong as long as it mantains in shape, in the case of a cylinder like the 40 the bigger u make the lowers in diameter the stronger it will be without having to add any material to make thicker walls...but again as i said, the strenght of it depends entirely on the structural integrity and not as much on the material as it is on the 888...remember this are only some thoughts of mine....could be true...couldn t be true...anyway...i would be really worried if i had gouges that big on a 40.
The gouge is in a dent too. I agree with the comparison to ths mono frame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
Those gouges aren't from impact though, are they TD? Those look like somebody's derailleur or pedals were rubbing on your fork while shuttling.

Two parallel, straight gouges going up the fork rather than across it? That isn't Fox's fault. I know you're not trying to place blame but people reading this thread will read into it that way. Buy some 2" ID tubing at a hose supply joint, split it, and snap it onto your lowers (and uppers) the next time you're doing shuttles.
 

·
Pro Crastinator
Joined
·
11,940 Posts
that is a gouge, not a little shuttle scrape....

besides. go look at a few gouged up forks, 90% of the gouges are in a vertical manner, there is just not enough surface area to be mostly horizontal gouges, while i'll agree that most scratches are horizontal, here is clearly a gouge..........
 

·
Innovate or die!
Joined
·
702 Posts
hmm

yeah I'm calling BS on this one too. I just let the Sea otter shuttle fools shuttle my 40 without protection for 25 runs. Not a scratch except sticker. That guy must have taken a Fyockin baseball bat to that!!? We wan't to know what happened, that is NOT fox fault but 100% yours. BTW fox and marzocchi both use magnesium lowers........ thats all in your head. Flicking that with your finger is southern hick tech........get a life and some reputable data and then come back lookin for sympathy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
.WestCoastHucker. said:
that is a gouge, not a little shuttle scrape....

besides. go look at a few gouged up forks, 90% of the gouges are in a vertical manner, there is just not enough surface area to be mostly horizontal gouges, while i'll agree that most scratches are horizontal, here is clearly a gouge..........
I have seen enough gouges that look exactly that this one from shuttles that I'm sticking with my original assessment. You would be surprised how one trip to the top getting solid pressure from a pedal pin against a magnesium fork lower can almost ruin the fork. Scott's old Armageddon frame had a gouge that was almost clear through his downtube from the same thing.

I am having a hard time picturing what else could have created two smooth, rounded gouges that are in-line like that other than two pedal pins rubbing on the fork while in the back of a pickup.
 

·
Pro Crastinator
Joined
·
11,940 Posts
think about it...
go out to your garage and try to lay one bike on top of the other so that the pins of a pedal (which will be perpindicular to the side of an opposing fork lower) rub on a fork lower this way, you can easily make it rub the front or back of the lower, not the side, turning the fork so the pedal can rub on the side of the lower will cause the front tire to push the opposing bike away...........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
.WestCoastHucker. said:
think about it...
go out to your garage and try to lay one bike on top of the other so that the pins of a pedal (which will be perpindicular to the side of an opposing fork lower) rub on a fork lower this way, you can easily make it rub the front or back of the lower, not the side, turning the fork so the pedal can rub on the side of the lower will cause the front tire to push the opposing bike away...........
Right, I forgot that the fork can't be rotated so that it's not facing exactly forward. Oh wait, yes it can. :rolleyes:
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top